Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I have long said that you could fund the CAF to 4 percent of GDP, but we would still lag behind in NATO and be much the same where we are.

It's never the money, it's politics. It's procedures. It's the pork-barreling in our defence spending that makes us a paper tiger in NATO.

My only hope in all of this for the CAF and the GoC, whatever the political stripe that may be, is that it will rouse them out of the "Peace Dividend" slumber. The world has been unstable since 1945. We have used geography, proximity, and association as a Defence Policy ever since. ICBMs don't care how close to the U.S. or how far from Russia/China we are.

Don't give us a dime more, but let us spend money on defence like it matters. The fact we follow the same rules for purchasing a fighter aircraft as we do for buying office furniture for a Service Canada office is disgraceful. Don't treat defense procurement as a stimulus package for Canadian Industry. There I said it.

We spend so much money, time, and effort trying to get that money to stay in Canada; be it by awarding contracts to companies with no capability to produce items without first "retooling" and"developing the production lines", or by hamstringing perfectly competent and competitive bidders by forcing the project to be made in St. Margaret de Poutain de Champignon, QC because the ruling government either lost the seat in the election, or won it with promises.

We spend so much money and staff hours jumping through TBS regulations that are great for other departments, but are terrible for defence procurement. Some items you have to sole source, because there are technologies and capabilities no one else makes. By doing the bid process, you get companies clamoring for a project they can't deliver on, but because they tick the bright boxes on the score sheet....

I truly and honestly belief we need to split from PSPC and legislate that its not beholden to TBS, only to the PBO/PCO. The guiding principles of this new Defence Procurement department should be "Off the shelf, from somewhere else" if there isn't an industry in Canada.

BOOTFORGEN has demonstrated how well we do when we are able to actually get what we need, instead of lining the pockets of a Canadian company that got lucky.

That, but with tanks, fighters, ships, weapons systems....

 

[Furniture]

I can remember one public facing document highlighting defence spending where they used an image of a Kresta II class cruiser ... in the mid 2000's.

I can see how it happens.

Some industrious Image Tech/PAO looks through Combat Camera for "cool" pictures, sees boats, and runs with it. Never considering to ask whether or not the "cool" picture is of Canadian kit.

If you're not into ships/military things, it's hard to tell an Arleigh Burke from a Halifax...

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

It is, you can see the ensign at the stern.

This screams CA/RCAF DEU Image Tech/PAO, that didn't bother to ask any of their white shirted brethren what kind of boats are in the shot.

Actually, they did ask exactly that question of their white shirted brethren: "What kind of boats are in this shot?" And they were told "Well, that's a RCN boat, why?" reply: "Just making sure it is".

Being CA/RCAF, however, they didn't know to ask the obvious follow up question: And what kind of ship is in this shot?

 

[Maxman1]

At least it wasn't this:

 

[SupersonicMax]

I can see how it happens.

Some industrious Image Tech/PAO looks through Combat Camera for "cool" pictures, sees boats, and runs with it. Never considering to ask whether or not the "cool" picture is of Canadian kit.

If you're not into ships/military things, it's hard to tell an Arleigh Burke from a Halifax...

The CF-18 Maintenance Record Set software had a top view Mig-29 outline as its icon until very recently….

 

[Grimey]

It is, you can see the ensign at the stern.

This screams CA/RCAF DEU Image Tech/PAO, that didn't bother to ask any of their white shirted brethren what kind of boats are in the shot.

Wasn’t there a Heritage Moment on CBC a few years back around rememberance day about “honouring our fallen” where the troops in the footage were German?

 

[Furniture]

Wasn’t there a Heritage Moment on CBC a few years back around rememberance day about “honouring our fallen” where the troops in the footage were German?

I think it was just a tweet from VAC, but it was definitely only a few years back.

 

[RangerRay]

Wasn’t there a Heritage Moment on CBC a few years back around rememberance day about “honouring our fallen” where the troops in the footage were German?

There was an RCL ad a few years ago that played Nazi-era German military music in the background.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Maybe it was a regiment from Berlin, Ontario?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/veterans-affairs-nazis-video-ve-day-1.5130515

 

[MilEME09]

'We need to pull our weight': Top soldier on feds' defence spending record

Outgoing Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Wayne Eyre says Canada is unprepared to meet the challenges of an increasingly insecure world and needs to step up for its allies, as it remains the only NATO member without a clear date to reach the group's spending commitments.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[rmc_wannabe]

'We need to pull our weight': Top soldier on feds' defence spending record

Outgoing Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Wayne Eyre says Canada is unprepared to meet the challenges of an increasingly insecure world and needs to step up for its allies, as it remains the only NATO member without a clear date to reach the group's spending commitments.

www.ctvnews.ca

He is spot on in his assessment, as usual. Hopefully it's in the handover notes for his replacement.

 

[FJAG]

'We need to pull our weight': Top soldier on feds' defence spending record

Outgoing Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Wayne Eyre says Canada is unprepared to meet the challenges of an increasingly insecure world and needs to step up for its allies, as it remains the only NATO member without a clear date to reach the group's spending commitments.

www.ctvnews.ca

Sorry, but the cynicism in me just won't let go. The first problem that DND and the civil service needs to fix is the high cost of running DND which is unrelated to producing defence deliverables.

In 2002 the defence budget was 8.5 billion. That was the end of the decade of darkness and the spending soon started ramping up. $8.5 billion in adjusted for inflation to 2024 dollars is $13.7 billion. The annual budget for 2023/24 was $26.5 billion. That's nearly double the 2002 budget in current dollars. And yet Canada's military capabilities have dropped since 2002 while the cost of administering defence and the timelines for equipment procurement keep rising.

Here's the simple mathematical conclusion. Regardless of how much money the government throws at defence, the convoluted and impractical system of administration will eat up those sums and perhaps, perhaps, will leave a little aside for capability improvements. Full-time personnel costs are DND's biggest cross to bear. That has to change.

 

[dapaterson]

Defence inflation is materially greater than the normal CPI. That is not acknowledged at senior levels of government.

DND / CAF create initiatives that they pay out of current funds, rather than being good bureaucrats and seeking new money for new things. That weakens sustainment of the things that are and the new things begun.

The mobility of the military (postings) creates a Schrodinger type problem: CAF member pay as an individual appears high, but the inability to have a consistent, reliable second household income creates additional pressure on earnings.

A detailed deconstruction of the foundational failings of Defence accounting and reporting would require months of effort... But suffice it to say that there's a need for a crew of CPAs to unpack what / how / why spending is what it is, where it goes, and how to optimize things.

 

[FJAG]

Defence inflation is materially greater than the normal CPI. That is not acknowledged at senior levels of government.

True enough, but that generally applies to capital equipment. The vast bulk of defence expenditures are in the nature of personnel costs and O&M.

DND / CAF create initiatives that they pay out of current funds, rather than being good bureaucrats and seeking new money for new things. That weakens sustainment of the things that are and the new things begun.

The mobility of the military (postings) creates a Schrodinger type problem: CAF member pay as an individual appears high, but the inability to have a consistent, reliable second household income creates additional pressure on earnings.

That is very much one of the things that ought to high on the list of things to change. I'll spare you a repetition of my various thoughts on how. But what the hell - see here.

A detailed deconstruction of the foundational failings of Defence accounting and reporting would require months of effort... But suffice it to say that there's a need for a crew of CPAs to unpack what / how / why spending is what it is, where it goes, and how to optimize things.

That would be a tiny, but necessary, start.

 

[ueo]

He is spot on in his assessment, as usual. Hopefully it's in the handover notes for his replacement.

Ok who wants the job?

 

[rmc_wannabe]

Ok who wants the job?

That's the kicker. I would say its less a matter of who wants it, and more a case of who the GiC thinks will tow the party line.

General Eyre has been fighting against the GoC's "rosy" defence picture like the 3rd monkey on Noah's Ark after feeling a couple rain drops. I think Team Red will want someone less vocal and more malleable this time around.

 

[daftandbarmy]

That's the kicker. I would say its less a matter of who wants it, and more a case of who the GiC thinks will tow the party line.

General Eyre has been fighting against the GoC's "rosy" defence picture like the 3rd monkey on Noah's Ark after feeling a couple rain drops. I think Team Red will want someone less vocal and more malleable this time around.

Every time the poor guy appears on TV I keep conjuring images like this:

 

[dapaterson]

True enough, but that generally applies to capital equipment. The vast bulk of defence expenditures are in the nature of personnel costs and O&M.

There is a large proportion of Defence expenditures in O&M that is acquisition of military specific items (ammunition and materiel), plus military specific services (engineering and maintenance). Those are subject to higher inflation.

So, for example, if the RCAF acquires new air to air missiles, those are an O&M cost... And the cost of periodic recertification of said missiles by the OEM is also O&M.

 

[Good2Golf]

Ok who wants the job?

The one who is out of consideration now for…reasons.

 

[MilEME09]

There is a large proportion of Defence expenditures in O&M that is acquisition of military specific items (ammunition and materiel), plus military specific services (engineering and maintenance). Those are subject to higher inflation.

So, for example, if the RCAF acquires new air to air missiles, those are an O&M cost... And the cost of periodic recertification of said missiles by the OEM is also O&M.

There is room for improvement, CAF is experimenting with metal 3D printing to reduce costs for example. US navy for example successfully implemented it for parts needed for changing tires on a F18. Reduced the cost from 100k to under 10k

 

[dapaterson]

There is room for improvement, CAF is experimenting with metal 3D printing to reduce costs for example. US navy for example successfully implemented it for parts needed for changing tires on a F18. Reduced the cost from 100k to under 10k

There are areas for innovation and improvement. But in many areas there are IP considerations of security considerations that limit the ability to do things in house.